I think it's clear Chris prefers a softer stock. While he may not have commented on the handling of the S&B deck, it is pretty obvious from the video that they are a bit clumpy. None of his fans or spreads were really even with the S&B when compared to the other decks he handled. But that is to be expected with cards with foiled backs, they just aren't going to handle as well. This is probably why Chris liked the Chosen deck the best (which was the only non-foiled deck and with the softest stock) when compared to the other two decks which are foiled. I wish he compared the Sud Finished Chosen deck directly with a Bicycle Rider Back as a comparative point of reference between the USPCC and EPCC. He may have liked the Chosen deck the best among the 3 EPCC decks, but how about in comparison to a Rider Back?EndersGame wrote:He's not crazy about the Master Finish of the Exquisite bolder deck (too stiff), but really likes the Stud Finish of the Chosen deck. Unfortunately we don't get to find out whether the Skull & Bones deck he samples has the JN Finish or the Stud Finish. Furthermore, these have a eye-catching iridescent foil on the card-backs, and Chris is so caught up with telling us how ugly he thinks that looks, that he doesn't really comment on the handling of those cards.
Getting away from the handling of the decks, I want to comment on the print runs and the refracted foiling. In this age of playing card production, I do not consider a 1000 deck print run "limited" anymore. In the past couple of years, the majority of KS decks not made by the USPCC (so we're talking EPCC, LPCC, MPC, NPCC, etc...) are 1000 deck print runs. So the allegedly ultra limited S&B deck is no more rare than the typical KS deck. I disagreed with Chris on the looks of the foiled S&B deck. I didn't find them ugly and off-putting like he did. I like the refracted foiling and I appreciate how EPCC is always pushing the tech aspect of the bells and whistles you can put on a deck. Having said that, I will concede the back design of the S&B deck is not conducive to an all-over refracted foil coverage because it makes the backs look very busy and dizzying. This type of super blingy foil should be used more judiciously. It may have been better to have used regular foil on the S&B with only the two skulls in the center receiving the refracted foil treatment. Or maybe the refracted foil would be better received in a geometric, color-blocked pattern on the back instead of a more intricate pattern like you see in the scroll work on the back of the S&B deck.
I found this video to be very interesting, it was great to see another unbiased perspective on EPCC.